6 ms·

Good point. The Navy is by far the most important branch of any military.

by water8 5y ago

CamperBob2 5y ago
Dammit, and here I am, fresh out of popcorn.
unclewalter 5y ago
Uzbekistan and Liechtenstein might disagree.
- water8 5y ago
  There’s no home field advantage in war
  - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
    >There’s no home field advantage in war Doubtful[1][2][3][4] [1] https://i.pinimg.com/originals/a9/78/53/a9785360d124d8aaa6232b672b5d4011.jpg https://i.pinimg.com/originals/a9/78/53/a9785360d124d8aaa623... [2] https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-nRSimtZke9k/WWlqQvTqa6I/AAAAAAAANNI/bxyiN7lGO_oiE1729y6-jIMkbIw1AWlBgCLcBGAs/s1600/Soviet_War_in_Afghanistan_in_pictures%2B%252816%2529.jpg https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-nRSimtZke9k/WWlqQvTqa6I/AAAAAAAAN... [3] https://images.fineartamerica.com/images-medium-large-5/18-battle-of-bunker-hill-1775-granger.jpg https://images.fineartamerica.com/images-medium-large-5/18-b... [4] https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-G2GwFIKQQpI/VcDUw4Y8N9I/AAAAAAAACUI/TeAKhn2N18c/w1200-h630-p-k-no-nu/vietcong.jpg https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-G2GwFIKQQpI/VcDUw4Y8N9I/AAAAAAAAC... And that's just the tip of the iceberg of examples.
  - Cthulhu_ 5y ago
    The US has lost (or not definitively won) every war since WW2, none of which were on home field.
    - skhr0680 5y ago
      Three examples off the top of my head: The Korean War technically isn’t over, and since both sides claim they won, you’ll have to pick a winner yourself. The US military’s extreme prowess in the first Iraq war was the last evidence the Soviets needed that they had lost the Cold War. The US was able to achieve its goals in Yugoslavia in a straightforward manner.
      - Stranger43 5y ago
        In all of those cases there is one or more nations with an much stronger claim to victory then the US. The cold war was an implosion by economics and the vast bulk of the preasure came from western europe who alost harvested nearly all of the victory gains, and that happened years before the first gulf war. The US Acted as a poorly paid mercenary force for the houses of Said doing the first and second gulf war and the long term strategic goal went in Iran's favor when the US/Saudi backed puppet government of Iraq imploded and someone else had to step in and deal with ISIS(that someone else originally turned out to be Iran's republican guard backed by Russian advisors and hardware). Kosovo again had Europe playing they leading role in the diplomacy both post and doing the war and harvesting most of the benefits. Outside of late western Roman empire, i can think of few nations where the army was as impotent in terms of actually backing the diplomatic game or rather where the diplomats where as incompetent that despite having the best trained/funded army no tactical victory was too great to turn into an strategic defeat.
    - water8 5y ago
      Iraq was concurred in 2 months the 2nd time. That was the war. If the leader of an enemy was hiding in a dirt hole in the ground and then hanged and that isnt a win to you then your definition is wrong. You are confusing nation building with war.
- smegger001 5y ago
  and look they don't have coastal waters /s
sandworm101 5y ago
This wouldn't be a navy issue. This is illegal fishing, a matter for a coast guard (law enforcement) rather than a navy. The navy guards the sea against other navies. A coast guard arrests criminals.
- syops 5y ago
  China uses armed fishing boats in their giant fishing flotillas. https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/04/19/manilas-images-are-revealing-the-secrets-of-chinas-maritime-militia/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/04/19/manilas-images-are-reve...
- Stranger43 5y ago
  Very few countries other then the us and Canada actually maintain a blue/green water coast guard i.e. a lot of navies around the world does a lot of law enforcement doing peace time. This is the case for most European nations where almost anything bigger then a launch is classed as a navel vessel and potentially armed. And then there is the oddities like japan who theoretically do not have an navy but who's cost guard(or self defense force) operate carriers.
  - sandworm101 5y ago
    The nature of the boats is beside the point. Navy vessels can be used, but they will usually carry law enforcement people. It is like using an army to arrest drug dealers. While it is physically possible, nearly every nation would only deploy military assets "in aid of" local police. Very few nations would tolerate their militaries enforcing local laws, especially when that would mean those militaries also spying on citizens. Police are allowed to do that, not soldiers. By that same token, just as a cop can be aided by a navy destroyer they could be supported by a foreign navy vessel too.
    - userulluipeste 5y ago
      "Police are allowed to do that, not soldiers." It may be more that police is trained to do that compared to soldiers, as in order to be effective in what they supposed to do, they all should be specialized. And yes, when it comes to fighting drug dealers and all around looks more like a war zone instead of a "misbehaving civilians" affair, then a more appropriate tool use gets warranted.
dpq 5y ago
cries in Mongolian

Good point. The Navy is by far the most important branch of any military.

by water8 5y ago

Good point. The Navy is by far the most important branch of any military.

CamperBob2 5y ago

Dammit, and here I am, fresh out of popcorn.

unclewalter 5y ago

Uzbekistan and Liechtenstein might disagree.

water8 5y ago
There’s no home field advantage in war
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  >There’s no home field advantage in war Doubtful[1][2][3][4] [1] https://i.pinimg.com/originals/a9/78/53/a9785360d124d8aaa6232b672b5d4011.jpg https://i.pinimg.com/originals/a9/78/53/a9785360d124d8aaa623... [2] https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-nRSimtZke9k/WWlqQvTqa6I/AAAAAAAANNI/bxyiN7lGO_oiE1729y6-jIMkbIw1AWlBgCLcBGAs/s1600/Soviet_War_in_Afghanistan_in_pictures%2B%252816%2529.jpg https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-nRSimtZke9k/WWlqQvTqa6I/AAAAAAAAN... [3] https://images.fineartamerica.com/images-medium-large-5/18-battle-of-bunker-hill-1775-granger.jpg https://images.fineartamerica.com/images-medium-large-5/18-b... [4] https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-G2GwFIKQQpI/VcDUw4Y8N9I/AAAAAAAACUI/TeAKhn2N18c/w1200-h630-p-k-no-nu/vietcong.jpg https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-G2GwFIKQQpI/VcDUw4Y8N9I/AAAAAAAAC... And that's just the tip of the iceberg of examples.
- Cthulhu_ 5y ago
  The US has lost (or not definitively won) every war since WW2, none of which were on home field.
  - skhr0680 5y ago
    Three examples off the top of my head: The Korean War technically isn’t over, and since both sides claim they won, you’ll have to pick a winner yourself. The US military’s extreme prowess in the first Iraq war was the last evidence the Soviets needed that they had lost the Cold War. The US was able to achieve its goals in Yugoslavia in a straightforward manner.
    - Stranger43 5y ago
      In all of those cases there is one or more nations with an much stronger claim to victory then the US. The cold war was an implosion by economics and the vast bulk of the preasure came from western europe who alost harvested nearly all of the victory gains, and that happened years before the first gulf war. The US Acted as a poorly paid mercenary force for the houses of Said doing the first and second gulf war and the long term strategic goal went in Iran's favor when the US/Saudi backed puppet government of Iraq imploded and someone else had to step in and deal with ISIS(that someone else originally turned out to be Iran's republican guard backed by Russian advisors and hardware). Kosovo again had Europe playing they leading role in the diplomacy both post and doing the war and harvesting most of the benefits. Outside of late western Roman empire, i can think of few nations where the army was as impotent in terms of actually backing the diplomatic game or rather where the diplomats where as incompetent that despite having the best trained/funded army no tactical victory was too great to turn into an strategic defeat.
  - water8 5y ago
    Iraq was concurred in 2 months the 2nd time. That was the war. If the leader of an enemy was hiding in a dirt hole in the ground and then hanged and that isnt a win to you then your definition is wrong. You are confusing nation building with war.
smegger001 5y ago
and look they don't have coastal waters /s

sandworm101 5y ago

This wouldn't be a navy issue. This is illegal fishing, a matter for a coast guard (law enforcement) rather than a navy. The navy guards the sea against other navies. A coast guard arrests criminals.

syops 5y ago
China uses armed fishing boats in their giant fishing flotillas. https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/04/19/manilas-images-are-revealing-the-secrets-of-chinas-maritime-militia/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/04/19/manilas-images-are-reve...
Stranger43 5y ago
Very few countries other then the us and Canada actually maintain a blue/green water coast guard i.e. a lot of navies around the world does a lot of law enforcement doing peace time. This is the case for most European nations where almost anything bigger then a launch is classed as a navel vessel and potentially armed. And then there is the oddities like japan who theoretically do not have an navy but who's cost guard(or self defense force) operate carriers.
- sandworm101 5y ago
  The nature of the boats is beside the point. Navy vessels can be used, but they will usually carry law enforcement people. It is like using an army to arrest drug dealers. While it is physically possible, nearly every nation would only deploy military assets "in aid of" local police. Very few nations would tolerate their militaries enforcing local laws, especially when that would mean those militaries also spying on citizens. Police are allowed to do that, not soldiers. By that same token, just as a cop can be aided by a navy destroyer they could be supported by a foreign navy vessel too.
  - userulluipeste 5y ago
    "Police are allowed to do that, not soldiers." It may be more that police is trained to do that compared to soldiers, as in order to be effective in what they supposed to do, they all should be specialized. And yes, when it comes to fighting drug dealers and all around looks more like a war zone instead of a "misbehaving civilians" affair, then a more appropriate tool use gets warranted.

dpq 5y ago

cries in Mongolian